Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill

I move, That the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill be now read a second time. This bill will enable the settlement of all historical Treaty claims of Ngāi Tūhoe. As is very well-known and does not need repetition here, their grievances are significant, longstanding, and overdue for a just and a durable settlement. The bill reconnects Ngāi Tūhoe with Te Urewera and provides a firm foundation for improved relationships between the Crown and Ngāi Tūhoe.

I know that we have some Tūhoe guests in the gallery, so I simply want to say this to them: I do not think this is a time for long speeches. That can wait until the bill’s third reading, but I do want to acknowledge the excellent work of the Māori Affairs Committee. Over the past 6 months the bill has been considered by the committee, and I really do appreciate its consideration of the bill and the very close attention it paid to the issues raised in the submissions.

Committee members considered 69 submissions from interested groups and individuals, and heard 26 submitters. They held hearings in Whakatāne and in Wellington. So, once again, I congratulate the chair and the members on their tremendous work. I am grateful to those who took the time to make submissions on the bill. Their participation in the committee’s examination of a bill is an important component of Parliament’s consideration of Treaty settlement legislation. It was also very, very encouraging to hear from many of those who support the bill. The committee has proposed a number of minor, mostly technical, changes to the bill, and its report is most helpful in that regard.

I acknowledge the work of the Tūhoe negotiators—two of whom are in the gallery this morning—the Minister of Conservation and other Ministers, parliamentary colleagues, departments, and other agencies that have contributed to this bill. Concluding this settlement is one of the most significant achievements this Government has seen undertaken during its term. It addresses, as I said, some of the worst breaches of the Treaty in our history. I look forward to the bill progressing to its third reading to give effect to this very historic settlement. I commend the bill to the House.

I acknowledge the contribution of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and tend to agree that this is not the time for long speeches, but it is the time to go through, in some manner, the issues that were raised before the Māori Affairs Committee in so far as the submissions on the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill were concerned. They were substantial in our view. We do have a thorough report, Minister, preceding the second reading, which brings together the substance of our considerations. We, in good faith to those submitters, tried to whittle down the key components of their expectations and objections, in some respects, to aspects of this settlement.

I do believe that the select committee got to the right place in its deliberations and I want to commend the officials for the way in which they helped advise on all but one issue, which has been resolved by the select committee. I understand, Minister, that you will be continuing discussions on that front, and perhaps the House will be of a mind to consider your response in the Committee stages.

So let me go to the submission process. We went to Whakatāne and heard a number of submitters. We received around about 66 submissions in total—42 were in favour, 14 were opposed, and 10 presented a view neither one way or the other.

Can I say that—as I work through the bill and try to give it some consideration—there were the issues around Ngāti Ruapani, and there were the issues around the national park itself and aspirations for management and how that might take place, and the consequent impact on groups like Fish and Game and that community and hunters. There was a very strong representation from Te Tira Whakaemi o Te Wairoa. Also there were some reflections in a number of submissions around public access provisions for Te Urewera and also how the management board would conduct its very important obligation for this wonderful place.

As we work through each of those issues, in some respects it was helpful to know that the Minister had given an indication to Ngāti Ruapani that there would be a process for them in terms of their settlement, and that Onepoto would be set aside in terms of addressing their interests. That was certainly very helpful as we went through and considered the extent of their interest in Waikaremoana.

The issue of the ownership of the lake bed came up. We sought advice from parliamentary counsel just to give confidence that what was actually said and intended in the legislation was indeed the case. The lake bed is not factored into this settlement. However, we did receive submissions that tended to insinuate that the consequent effect of having a Te Urewera Board, a management board for the national park estate, would have an impact on the lake bed. We have clarified that within our commentary.

We were also mindful that in regard to the Lake Waikaremoana reserves there was also a parallel process continuing through the Māori Land Court. During the course of our deliberations we received the judgment of Judge Fox and we were then in a position to pursue clarification around clause 91, I think it was, and whether the interests in those 13 reserves could be transferred to the ahu whenua trust as was directed by Judge Fox. We received clarification from the Office of Treaty Settlements officials who assured us that, yes, that is the case.

The other aspect that we were mindful of was in relation to Fish and Game’s interpretation of the management plans that will be developed and how it would infringe on their existing rights. I know that the Deputy Speaker, being from the hunting community, would be quite acutely aware of those types of interests. In all honesty, I certainly expressed the view, and members of the committee agreed, that this is a new normal for many members of the wider community in so far as it is the intention in the way in which the Te Urewera Board will operate that management plans will be developed. There is the provision for consultation to occur but, again, all those issues will be lifted up to the board and have consequent effect not only on hunters and fishers but also on Tūhoe themselves in carrying out the obligation of the custodial protection of Te Urewera.

The public access provisions in particular have been set out in clause 112(2) and also in clause 176(1)(d), where there are issues around public access—the creation of by-laws. Again I draw the attention of the House and members here to those provisions because to some extent people might have got it in their heads—and I know this was certainly the narrative prior to seeing the detail of the legislation—that if Tūhoe take over the management of Te Urewera, then public access would be prevented. That is indeed not the case. It is clearly set out in the clauses of the bill, where not only is public access preserved but for very specific reasons by-laws can be created to be able to limit public access for specific purposes. There is opportunity also, through the management plans, for the public to have input.

So I think it is very important to again draw the attention of those listening to the debate on this bill with some intent, to assure them that public access continues. There is a management regime in place. There is the opportunity for public input. There are provisions for better management tools to be implemented for specific reasons, and we should be confident that a board with the range of interests represented can approach the long-term management and caring for Te Urewera in a way that better meets the needs of everyone in the community.

I am very pleased, out of all the settlement bills that we have got to, with the committee’s report and I thank the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee for being so accommodating to all the concerns that have been raised by the members. Your accommodation of those concerns allowed us to pursue with some vigour aspects that needed to be done, so that when this bill goes to its third reading it has the full support, I hope, of members of this House.

Minister, can I just lastly assure you that should your discussions with Ngāti Manawa and Tūhoe be successful to the degree that we are able to sort out the issues of the transfer of the remaining two properties, we would welcome further discussion in that space and we look forward to perhaps that detailed opportunity in the Committee stage. Tēnā tātou katoa.

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker, ā, tēnā koutou kua hoki mai nei ki tēnei Whare o tātou, ahakoa ēhara tēnei i te rā whakamutunga mō tēnei pire, e haere tonu ngā kōrero kia whakaotia ai ākuanei. Nā reira, tēnā koutou me ō koutou tini aituā nā koutou i tuku atu, nā tātou nā reira, waiho rātou ki a rātou. Ko te mea nui, ko tā tātou kaupapa nei i whakahuitia tātou, arā, ko te pire nei. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, nau mai, whakapiri mai.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Salutations to you collectively who have returned here to this House of ours, even though this is not the final day for this bill. Discussions to complete this stage will continue today. So greetings to you collectively, with your many deaths, whom you interred, as we all do. So therefore allow them to remain there amongst themselves. This matter of ours, this bill that assembled us here is the most important thing. Acknowledgments and congratulations to you collectively; welcome, draw closer.]

I am pleased to again rise in support of this bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill, to address the historical grievances of Ngāi Tūhoe. When this bill was introduced to the House last year, I said then that every New Zealander should know the history and stories of this country. I am pleased to announce that right now our Ministry of Education, our tāhuhu, is working on a whole scheme to set up a sort of a framework by which our history can be introduced into the school curriculum. Our history did not start with Captain Cook. All these things—the battles at Ōrākau and at Gate Pā, and so on—are unknown to tauiwi. How can they understand what it is like to be mana whenua, tangata whenua, if they have not learnt that part of our history?

Soon it will be in our curriculum. It will take a while to build up as each area contributes to the content, but hopefully all students will learn about the history of the locality of the school, the movement of tribes and hapū in past times, the battles, and then, of course, colonisation and the effect on language and how their grandmothers were punished for speaking Māori in school, and so on. I think this is major, and it is long overdue to inform the rest of New Zealand about our history in that time, and even today, so that schools can value their local marae, know their local hapū, and so on. I am really pleased that we have made progress in this particular area.

First of all, I would like to acknowledge Tau and the Māori Affairs Committee too, like the other two speakers did. There is no doubt the committee did a really good job on this one in going out there as well as having a hearing here in Wellington. That committee really does go unthanked. I spent time on that committee and it does the groundwork that allows bills to go through in the final form.

Upon reading the historical background to this settlement no fair-minded person could deny or dismiss the need to resolve the injustices that ensued. This bill documents a litany of disgraceful acts committed by the Crown against Ngāi Tūhoe over many generations. For its part, the Crown apologises to Tūhoe for the indiscriminate raupatu, wrongful killings, and years of scorched earth warfare, for denying Tūhoe the right of self-governing the Te Urewera reserve by subverting the Urewera District Native Reserve Act 1896 by excluding Tūhoe from the establishment of Te Urewera National Park over their homelands, and for wrongfully treating Lake Waikaremoana as Crown property for many years.

Tūhoe have always approached resolution of its disputes with the Crown in a principled and determined manner. Through this settlement the Crown has been given a second chance to bring honour to its ongoing relationship with Tūhoe. This bill contains a historical account of what happened in the past, together with an apology and some redress. This bill provides a foundation for the future. This bill has the potential to produce transformative results for Tūhoe. It is late, but here it is. History has shown that in order to build better and brighter futures for our tamariki, our mokopuna, and our whānau, hapū and iwi must be involved in making the decisions that effect the future. Tūhoe have always stuck by the philosophy of taking care of their own, a philosophy of self help—Tama tū, tama ora; tama moe, tama mate.

[Those who are productive will survive, and those who sit back will die or perish.]

Through a social agreement to build the capacity of Ngāi Tūhoe members, Ngāi Tūhoe are positioning themselves to manage their own affairs and improve the delivery of Government and iwi services to Tūhoe communities. The settlement is the enabler of a stronger Tūhoe economy. It is a lifeline that will help reinstate and redevelop Tūhoe independence and cultural permanency. These acts restore the honour of the Crown and rightly return to Tūhoe responsibility for their own health, education, housing, planning, justice, and other infrastructural needs. The key principles underpinning negotiations between the Crown and Tūhoe centred on the premise that self-government is the basic principle of democracy and that Tūhoe has a democratic right to self-government. Ko tō mana motuhake, ko tō Tūhoetanga. Ko tō Tūhoetanga, tō mana motuhake. Ka kore tēnei ēhara noa tātou.

[Your autonomy is your Tūhoeness; your Tūhoeness is your autonomy. Without this we will be nothing.]

Tūhoe were not signatories to the Treaty of Waitangi and have always maintained their right to uphold their unique Tūhoe values—always—their culture, their language, and their identity within Tūhoe homelands. Through this settlement Tūhoe has a political authority and the arrangements necessary to serve the needs of Tūhoe, their families, and their communities in all aspects of their daily lives.

This is an omnibus bill, to be split at a later stage into the Tūhoe Claims Settlement Bill and Te Urewera Bill. The parts of the bill that will become Te Urewera Bill will lay out striking new arrangements for the governance and management responsibilities and obligations over Te Urewera. The bill creates an independent legal authority for Te Urewera. It recognises Te Urewera in her own right, with her own identity. Te Urewera will be released from the shackles of Crown control and will be governed by Tūhoe and Crown nominees, with Tūhoe having an increased role in management over time. Cultural values associated with Te Urewera will be captured in the bill. These include principles relating to the protection of biodiversity, natural and historic heritage, and public input into the management and future public access. Internationally, agreements like these have been held up as important achievements for environmental protection. To promote its unique cultural values, Tūhoe will seek international recognition of Te Urewera as a Unesco biosphere reserve.

In the face of incredible injustice, today we witness the incredible generosity of the families of Tūhoe pōtiki who wish to settle their grievances with the Crown. I want to acknowledge the sacrifice, pain, and injustice Ngāi Tūhoe has endured due to the actions and the omissions of the Crown.

I would just like to acknowledge Minister Finlayson. This has been one of the most important areas of his work and he has been very, very active time and time again to get the bill to this stage, and soon to the final reading.

Again, I pay tribute to the sons and daughters of Hinepūkohurangi for their leadership and their mana. Tēnā koutou, tēnā tatou.

Ā, tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Tēnā tātou katoa ngā mema o te Whare nei. E te iwi kua tae mai i Tūhoe mana, Tūhoe reo, Tūhoe tangata, nau mai, nau mai, hoki mai. Ka nui te mihi ki a koutou kua tae mai, tēnā koutou katoa.

[And so, thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Salutations to you all members of this House. To the tribe who have arrived from Tūhoe, where status, language, and people prevail, welcome, welcome, and welcome back. I acknowledge you greatly and commend you all.]

I join with members of the House in rising in support of the second reading of a significant Treaty settlement bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill, and to acknowledge the people who have been instrumental in presenting this bill to the House today. I join with all members in acknowledging the work that has gone before us, and look forward to the third and final reading and passage of this bill.

Our side of the House, like all members of this House, supports and acknowledges the reconciliation process for historical breaches of the Treaty between the Crown and Māori, and we see the Waitangi Tribunal and the Treaty process as critical parts of that process. We acknowledge the commitment, particularly of Ngāi Tūhoe, to reach an agreement with the Crown today, but we also acknowledge that it must be a durable settlement.

Each settlement is unique, and its redress components attempt to restore what has been taken and what can be preserved and developed for future generations. I am going to touch on those shortly. We also acknowledge that Treaty settlements are an important part of our modern identity, and we hope that in this case Ngāi Tūhoe, the Crown, and our communities will better understand the conflict of our past and the commitment to resolve outstanding grievances in the hope of a shared future.

The Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill gives effect to the deed of settlement signed on 4 June 2013, in which the Crown and Tūhoe agreed to the final settlement of the historical Treaty of Waitangi claims of Tūhoe. The deed of settlement sets out in full the redress provided to Tūhoe in settlement of all of their historical claims.

Like with all calls I take on Treaty bills, I try to find the unique difference in this bill, and in each and every Treaty settlement bill that comes through this House. I particularly want to acknowledge—and there are many in this settlement—three unique aspects of this bill and acknowledge the innovation demonstrated by Ngāi Tūhoe negotiators. That is clearly Te Urewera, and I acknowledge that giving an area of land its own legislation is unique.

As far as our people are concerned, our awas, our maunga, and our whenua are like our tīpuna, and so giving Te Urewera its own legal structure is, I think, clearly innovative, and I want to acknowledge that. Te Urewera will have its own legislation and exist as a separate legal entity. It will be governed by Tūhoe and Crown nominees to act in the best interests of Te Urewera. In reading the details, it is a 50:50 split, but the descending Crown representation and return to full Tūhoe governance is, again, quite innovative, and I applaud both the negotiators and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for agreeing to that for this taonga of Te Urewera.

The other unique feature in this settlement is the mana motuhake redress, which relates to improved relationships between Tūhoe and the Crown, and the delivery of Government and iwi services to Tūhoe communities. Standing as a former negotiator, I know that that was something that our iwi were interested in entering into. Obviously, we did not have the kaha that Tūhoe have, but I do acknowledge that you were able to get this in your package, Tāmati. I know that having an influence on Government services that impact on your people’s lives is a critical step forward in helping manage what I believe are the issues that only we can tackle, and they are the issues of our own people. So I do want to acknowledge that particular aspect in this bill.

The third part is not so much a part, but an absolute acknowledgment, of the shared interest in the idyllic settlement of Waikaremoana. I want to again pay tribute to the manaaki and hūmārie way in which Ngāi Tūhoe negotiators have worked with all the people around Lake Waikaremoana: Ngāti Ruapani and, of course, Ngāti Kahungunu ki te Wairoa. I acknowledge that it is not often an easy thing to undertake. I do want to say that the way in which you have done that, the door that you have opened and availed to the people of Tūai and Lake Waikaremoana, knowing that often it is not an easy process when we have historic challenges around whakapapa—I do just want to go on record as saying that I appreciate the way and manner in which that has been done.

For the people of Waikaremoana, Tūhoe, Ngāti Ruapani, and Ngāti Kahungunu ki te Wairoa in terms of their interests in the Waikaremoana lake bed and surrounding reserve lands—clearly, in the Māori Affairs Committee process we received submissions from various groups to ensure that their interests around the lake bed and reserve lands surrounding it were going to be protected. I am very happy with the consideration given, the examination by the Māori Affairs Committee to ensure that those interests and submissions were not only received but taken seriously.

I want to acknowledge our chairman, the Hon Tau Henare, to whom we look, as members of the select committee, for win-wins. I want to say yet again that I do need to acknowledge your leadership, Tau, in ensuring that the passage of this bill came through as expediently as it possibly could without impinging on the rights of the submitters. I am happy with the position of ensuring that the Ngāti Kahungunu ki te Wairoa interest in the lake bed remains with the Wairoa Waikaremoana Māori Trust Board, which has a 28 percent interest, and 72 percent goes to the Ngāi Tūhoe entities. I particularly want to acknowledge the committee in coming to that conclusion.

In terms of the reserve lands, it is heartening to see that in March this year the ahu whenua trust ruling was made, which, again, protects the beneficial owners, the shareholders in the reserve lands surrounding Lake Waikaremoana. We had several submitters passionately wanting to preserve their rights and interests in those reserve lands. Again, this goes to show the constructive way in which the Māori Affairs Committee works, and the advice that we get from officials to ensure that we get what we consider is a durable settlement at the end of the day.

There is much in this bill to highlight and celebrate. We will leave that for the third reading. This is, really, my opportunity to acknowledge and thank Ngāi Tūhoe negotiators, ably led by Tāmati Kruger; the governors and negotiators of Ngāi Tūhoe; obviously, the honourable Minister Chris Finlayson and his officials for opening negotiations and negotiating this settlement bill through the House; and, of course, my colleagues in the Māori Affairs Committee. I enjoy working with them. Like all members of this House, I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora tātou.

Tēnā koutou e te Whare. The land that is the subject of this settlement bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill, was confiscated in 1865. The iwi at the time were not in rebellion. They were rightly and justly living as an independent nation, as was their right. The confiscation, which caused enormous harm at the time, was compounded by the courts, which later gave land away to others, compounding the harms, and then, later still, by Government inducements in the form of threats—“Either sell it to us or we’ll take it.”—which, again, compounded even more the harms that had been caused.

This land, like all the land in this country, has been subject to an incredibly abusive process by various Governments over many years—some that, like today’s Government, will claim that good is being done when in fact harms are still being committed. We have to accept that to some extent our process here will never fully right what was wrong and will never fully return to those who are entitled what was wrongly taken from them. That is a hard situation to be in for us making the decision. It is worse, of course, for those who are subject to it.

This bill is an attempt to repair some of that hurt and to restore some of those resources back to the people who actually own them, but the damage is done. We can see that damage and that hurt reflected in the Māori Affairs Committee when people come to us with concerns that they have been raising either with Government or with other iwi or through agencies or the courts—still, decade after decade after decade. Iwi attempts to work through the Crown’s process for restitution has itself exacerbated the harms of the past. It is expensive. It takes many, many years. It is often the same argument that iwi are running time after time with different Ministers, with different Governments, with different courts, and with different judges, and they are never properly heard and never properly dealt with.

This settlement is part of a much larger and older series of systems and negotiations and, at the end of the day, concessions that are made by iwi Māori in an attempt to find some way to work effectively together. It is an enormously generous act of iwi Māori that they still engage with us as a Parliament and they still engage with Government as an agency when they know and we know that the harm will not fully be repaired. They know and we know that harm will be created in the process itself. I want to pay enormous respect to those who have been working through these negotiations, particularly for this land in these circumstances. The minefield of a Government-driven process is very, very hard work.

We heard in the select committee very significant concerns from iwi and from hapū that, as I have said, clearly have a very long history premised in previous Crown-inflicted harm. We will not have time to go into all of the issues in detail because they were significant and there were a number of them, but I do want to just acknowledge Ngāti Manawa, Ngāti Haka Patuheuheu, Ngāti Moewhare, Ngāti Whare, Ruapani, Kahungunu, and all of those who came and reiterated yet again, for our benefit but to some harm to them, the concerns that they have with this process.

But also I want to acknowledge Tūhoe for pursuing a settlement for Urewera; for pursuing their best possible attempts for the independence of that land, for self-government; for taking on a national park and all of the Pākehā history that is invested in that structure; and for finding a way to work through all of those issues with their own whānau, with Pākehā who have this deep commitment to the restoration and conservation of our land, and with a Crown-driven process that causes harm. It is an extraordinary act to have engaged with that. Tūhoe deserve the utmost respect, as all of those who engage with settlements deserve, for all of that hard work.

This settlement will fix some wrongs that have been committed in the past, and for that we should be very pleased, but it has created others. It certainly will not fix all of those that have been created. So let us remember, as we go through the process for this bill, that we still owe it to those who have been excluded and who are still bereft of their rightful entitlements to hold on to their concerns and to look for new ways to right them.

The Greens have long called for a significant review of this settlement process. It was designed by the Government. It was designed by Pākehā. Although it has evolved a little over the last many years, it has never been a process driven, determined, by Māori. That is its fundamental flaw. No Government has seriously addressed that fundamental flaw. If it was driven by Māori, we would have a very different kind of process, and rightly so. It should not be the perpetrator who decides how justice is meted out. Thank you.

Te mea tuatahi, kei a koutou e aku rangatira, e aku tuākana Mātaatua, tēnā koutou katoa.

[Firstly, to you collectively, my leaders and elder siblings of Mātaatua, salutations to you all.]

Theft, lies, blackmail, and then more lies. Those are the ingredients for a ripping Dan Brown or John le Carré novel that you would love to pick up and read. But no, it is a historical record of what happened to an indigenous nation some 100-odd years ago. That is the litany of Government theft, lies, blackmail, and more lies. I will keep this reasonably brief and I will leave the esoteric to my other colleagues who can think better than I can. No. 1 is the theft, as the story goes. This is the first chapter that you read in the Singapore airport as you pick up the novel. Tūhoe were an independent nation who did not sign up to the Treaty of Waitangi, had no rebellious thought—they were not in rebellion against the Crown, or anybody else for that matter, at that particular time. Then out of the blue the most productive land was confiscated by another nation—the Government, more particularly. The confiscation was directed solely at Tūhoe.

The next chapter is the lies. The prejudice created by the confiscation was exacerbated by the Compensation Court process, which returned much of the confiscated land to other Māori, and not those from Tūhoe, who had traditionally occupied and cultivated that area of land. So it begins, and the story starts to unravel. The blackmail came in 1875, when the Crown induced Tūhoe to sell a large area of land at Waikaremoana by threatening to confiscate their interests if they did not sell. So you can see the story unravelling, and it is like a novel. You would think that this could happen only in somebody’s head. Unfortunately, it did not.

Now we get to the more lies part. After years and years of struggle, Tūhoe sought to protect their remaining lands from sale, and in 1896, Parliament—this Parliament—enacted the Urewera District Native Reserve Act. This provided for local self-government over a 656,000-acre Urewera District Native Reserve and for decisions about the use of the land to be made collectively and according to Māori custom. Tūhoe believed that this system would protect their lands from sale. As we know, however, the Crown did not implement the self-government provisions of that Act and undermined its protective provisions.

So there are four things in that litany of a Government attack of theft, lies, blackmail, and more lies on what was and still is, to me, an independent nation. The final chapter of this book—of this story—for us will come in the third reading. I will leave my other pearls—maybe not pearls of wisdom, but pearls—to that third reading process. But I must say, and this is from deep down within me, that Tūhoe have a particular mystery about them and that is why I love Tūhoe people. When they talk, they miss out a few letters. When they talk of their stories and of the people they are, the whole “legend”—and I put that in inverted commas—of Tūhoe resounds around our nation. They are one of the people who make us who we are. Whether we are from the north, south, east, or west, and whether we are black or white, Tūhoe has a particular place in New Zealand’s folklore. I will leave the rest for the third reading, and thank you very much. Kia ora.

Kia ora. Tēnā koutou katoa. Tūhoe’s case for justice is not in dispute. Tūhoe’s case is about belatedly attempting to correct a grave series of historical wrongs. Tūhoe’s grievance is recognised by New Zealand First, and we have never ever thought otherwise. But on 31 May last year we wrote to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations because we were concerned about the boundaries being encompassed within this bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill, in an endeavour to settle with Tūhoe. Nothing we are going to say today is any way a questioning of or attack on Tūhoe’s leadership or their long-suffering forbearance over decades. We in New Zealand First accept that, respect that, salute that, and honour them for that.

However, the issue for us becomes whether this bill is in fact going to do what it claims to do—that is, to resolve a historical wrong. We fear, on the evidence and on the history that we understand, that there are other claimants being swept within the boundaries of this bill who themselves are going to be wronged because of it. In short, we are concerned about the eastern boundary of the claim within this legislation. Let us be very clear: New Zealand First is not opposed in any way, shape, or form to attempting to fix up this grave historical wrong, but we do not want one created as well whilst we try to do that.

💬 Hon Member: That’s a really good point.

It is a very good point. I wrote to Mr Finlayson, and he wrote this back: “The substance of Ngāi Tūhoe’s settlement has been well-scrutinised by the Waitangi Tribunal and the High Court as a result of concerns of other iwi and hapū whose areas of interest overlap with that of Ngāi Tūhoe. The Waitangi Tribunal and the High Court have concluded that the proposed Ngāi Tūhoe settlement does not”—and these are the very critical words—“prejudice the interests of any other iwi or hapū.”

Well, what about Ūpokorehe’s claim? And who here is going to tell me that they have not got a legitimate concern under this bill? The finest Māori politician who has ever been—in fact, one of the finest politicians this country has ever seen—was a man called Sir Apirana Ngata. If Sir Apirana Ngata way back in 1929 recognised the iwi I am talking about, who here is going to dispute it? Who in this Parliament, including the Minister, including the High Court, including the department, and including all these other so-called experts, is going to dispute that back in 1929 Sir Apirana Ngata, the then Minister—that is, the Minister of Native Affairs, as it was at the time—issued a seal and ensign recognising that iwi’s status to Ōpōtiki and to the Ōhiwa Harbour connection? Except that in this bill, all of a sudden Tūhoe is at the edge and has claims to Ōhiwa Harbour and traditional fishing rights.

I want to know from some Māori member who sat on that committee what happened to the claimants about whom I speak—those claimants who somebody no less than the absolutely, totally esteemed leader Apirana Ngata recognised way back on 12 December 1929. If you are going to say that these people’s rights are not in any way trammelled or fettered or influenced—

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Why didn’t you come to the select committee?

Well, I cannot come to the Māori Affairs Committee, because I am on so many other ones. Unlike that member, I actually do some work. Unlike that member, I am on other select committees, and we cannot be on them all. But long before he got here, I was aware of this issue.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Weren’t you Minister of Māori Affairs?

I am the Minister, Mr Henare, who went to Tūhoe and gave them back their land. What is his record?

💬 Hon Tau Henare: What did you do?

Oh no, I am the Minister—

💬 Hon Tau Henare: What did you do?

See, here we go. He wants to shout down—

💬 Hon Nanaia Mahuta: My apologies for interrupting the member in mid-sway, but I seek leave to table for the benefit of the member, because New Zealand First is not represented on the Māori Affairs Committee, the departmental report dated 19 March, drawing specific attention to page 5—

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is a public record.

💬 Hon Nanaia Mahuta: —which details the issues—

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Firstly, I disapprove of the member interrupting to table a document. The second thing is that I am not going to put the leave, because it is a public document.

I want to remind that member out there who was interjecting that, unlike his record, I went to Tūhoe—and they will remember it—back in 1991, and we handed back that land at their request.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Who tried to stop the inquiry into Waikaremoana?

No one else did, so let us not have this sort of humbug here. I am not disputing Waikaremoana; I am not disputing anything else, but what I am disputing is that on the eastern boundary I have a concern that some people’s rights to a fair hearing will be compromised. If you say this—

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Mates.

Look, you are not a lawyer, Mr Henare, so why do you not keep quiet for a second.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: You’re not a lawyer, either.

Yes, I am a lawyer, actually—a very esteemed one. Can I just say this. When you say something like “does not prejudice the interests of any other iwi or hapū.”, ask yourself, historically, can that possibly be true? We know what happens if a settlement like this gets through. If there is a legitimate claimant and they go through the same process, it will become so much harder. That is why this is happening here, and it is happening up there in the far north. It is happening up there in Tai Tokerau as we speak, and there is no way this Minister is going to get a settlement up there, for the very same reasons. There is a dispute as to who speaks for what, where, and when, and it is a very, very valid dispute. No one is challenging Tūhoe here. I am just saying: “Let us have a settlement”—[Interruption] I beg your pardon?

💬 Hon Tau Henare: But.

Well, at least I am saying “but”. How can you say that Ōhiwa and access to the coast was a Tūhoe right all those years ago? They had access to Tangaroa. They had access to Tangaroa and it is a different principle, and one that this Minister does not understand. But that is a totally different principle to ownership, and just because some courts find it this way and just because some civil servants find it this way and just because the Waitangi grievance procedure finds it this way, it does not make right. We have been around too long to accept that as fundamental. I want to say to Mr Henare one more time: do you think you know more than Sir Apirana Ngata?

💬 Hon Tau Henare: What the hell has that got to do with it?

Well, it has got everything to do with it. If in 1929 the Minister of Native Affairs recognised these people as having legitimate claims, why is this member disputing it? Why, for example, is my esteemed colleague Pita Sharples going to argue against his former great leader? Or does he say that Sir Apirana Ngata was wrong? That is all I am saying. I think it is a valid point to put, because if you are going to have a settlement of a grave and serious wrong, which these people have suffered under for so long, let us, for goodness’ sake, get it right.

The Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill is a unique settlement. According to some academics, it is an “ingenious alchemy”, where it is governed by Tūhoe and the Crown. Te Urewera legislation will provide for each whānau and hapū within the valleys of Te Urewera to be recognised as kaitiakitanga and, over time, with the Department of Conservation, to formulate management plans, integrating mātauranga Tūhoe me mātauranga Te Papa Atawhai. Te Urewera nature is perhaps the embodiment of God’s wealth. This is a world-first Treaty, and one that can be replicated globally, and I commend it to the House.

Kia ora. E ngā mana, e ngā reo, rau rangatira mā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa. Ngā mihi Tūhoe. Kia ora for your contribution to your settlement bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill, within the context of a May 2010 decision by the Prime Minister not to include Te Urewera. I actually want to focus on the leadership within Tūhoe to stay focused on one of the most important acknowledgments within your settlement legislation, and so I mihi to the leadership of Tūhoe for getting us to this place where you are satisfied with this bill. I have every faith and confidence in your ability to work with your uri and other iwi groups on your border—so your whanaunga.

I actually believe that there is some integrity in the settlement process that means that Māori collectively will be able to move forward into the space that you want to take your people. One of the challenges moving forward for us as a House, though, will be to ensure we monitor the implementation of this legislation with the utmost of good faith, because one of the things that we recognise is that the historical relationship between all of our iwi groups and the Crown has been abysmal. It has been shocking. It has been terrible. In fact, it was the Crown that perpetrated a lot of the conflict confiscation on our mana whenua, and it is only in what happens post - these settlements that will actually make the partnership—that relationship between the Crown and mana whenua—real.

So I acknowledge your mana motuhake agreement. Tūhoe and the Crown have a Nā Kōrero Ranatira ā Tūhoe me Te Karaunga relationship agreement. The intention of that agreement is to ensure that Tūhoe and the Crown, post-settlement, will negotiate about how education is delivered in Tūhoe and how social services are delivered in Tūhoe. It will be founded on Tūhoetanga. It will be driven and delivered by Tūhoe people. I think, actually, that the most significant part of this settlement agreement, other than the return of Te Urewera, is the relationship agreements, the memorandums of understanding that have been established within the context of this piece of legislation. We are looking back to go forward, but I think that it is the forward-looking remembering of our past that will actually create the partnership that the Treaty envisaged and guaranteed for us as a country.

I have faith in the process—not only our parliamentary process but our Treaty settlement process with the involvement of all the different organisations, including the law and the legal aspects—to us to get to this point of resolution. What these settlements are all about are truth and reconciliation processes. They are really about how we move forward positively as a nation, ensuring that our mana whenua and our iwi are recognised in terms of the historical relationship they have had with the Crown. But, as I have said before, the most important aspect of these settlements is the going forward.

What I want to conclude with finally is that Tūhoe for me have always been incredibly staunch. Whenever I have gone to kapa haka they are the fiercest, most staunch proponents of kapa haka. And what does that mean to me? It means that they are very loyal, very committed to Tūhoetanga. I commend Tūhoe for their projection always of their Tūhoetanga and I thank them. I agree with my colleague Metiria Turei that we have to thank our mana whenua, our iwi leadership, for enabling us to move on. Yes, we also should acknowledge the Māori Affairs Committee and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations—and in this particular bill I think the Hon Chris Finlayson has done a fantastic job—but for me it is always about the steadfast resolve of our iwi, who have got us to this point in time. So I thank you for your generosity and I look forward to the third reading of this bill, when I know that this place will be packed. Nō reira, thank you to those who have come. Safe travels home. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Ā, ka huri au ki ngā whānau whānui o Tūhoe, ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. And so, I turn to the extensive families of Tūhoe to acknowledge you all greatly. Greetings.]

I am pleased to take this very short call on this omnibus bill, the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill. I am pleased, and I am going to do this on a three-step method. I attended a conference last year, the E Tū Whānau conference, and the keynote speaker was none other than Tāmati Kruger. When he stood up, he said: “You know, when people stand up to speak there are three things that the audience are looking at: you get up, you get it out, and you sit down.” So I have got up, ladies and gentlemen. I am getting it out. I totally support the second reading of this bill.

I want to acknowledge that there are not many more words that I can say to support this bill. All the words have been said by my colleagues on the Māori Affairs Committee, by our Hon Chris Finlayson, who does a fabulous job in the Treaty negotiations work, and also by my colleague Tau Henare, who leads our committee. I am now going to sit down because I am now going to commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.

I call Iain Lees-Galloway. I understand this is not a split call.

This is not a split call. Labour supports the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill and we look forward to its further passage through the Committee stage and third reading.

I too thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for his considerable work and all members—all but one member—who have contributed to this debate. I acknowledge the iwi, and I support the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill.